Apology or Apologia? (Part II)

The New Times-SLO continues to face criticism and a loud and vociferous negative reaction to it's story published two weeks ago now on Meth. To the point that the paper was forced to respond last week to the growing outrage.

In part I, while primarily addressing the papers 'apology' for running the story, I touched on the negative reaction they've received:

The negative reaction has continued and grown in the week since in both numbers and strength. More importantly for the New Times (and also for their sister pub the Santa Maria Sun though to a lesser degree) it has extended itself to include their advertising roster.

So what exactly have people been saying? A lot. Editor Jim Mullin's apology was followed by pages of short letters sent to the New Times in reaction to their piece. Here is a sampling:

--The article had no redeeming value and was nothing more than an abuse of power in order to push the limits of decency. I can’t begin to tell you how incredibly insensitive and irresponsible the article was. I sincerely hope that all of you who allowed and supported this article feel the wrath of the community that trusted your publication into our homes and businesses.

Chris (a 21 year old reader who fits nicely in the 'alternative' weekly demo)

--as a result of your article and your editor’s decision to run this article, I can no longer tacitly recommend it as a reference for my courses. Until the editor or publisher of New Times retracts support of the publication of this article, I will also urge any business I patronize to discontinue distributing the paper.

Keith
San Luis Obispo

--As owner and general manager of Robin’s Restaurant, I am really torn about continuing to advertise with New Times. I will see what your next issue is all about, then decide. I feel I cannot support a newspaper that does not promote the well-being of our society by printing such articles like “Meth Made Easy.”

Shanny Covey

My personal favorite:

--As a card-carrying member of the ACLU and self-avowed liberal, I was extraordinarily disappointed in the poor judgment shown by the running of the meth cover story. This over-the-top and out-of-control journalism is exactly the kind of tripe the radical right uses to paint all liberals with a broad brush. I suspect this did not inflame as many conservatives who would blow this off as “one more example of liberals who are out of their minds” as much as it infuriates those of us who agree strongly with many of the views you espouse in New Times. But this article is one that goes past freedom of speech and into an area of decency and general community welfare. I still do not understand what your intent was in writing and publishing such a piece. To promote very liberal and radical views, I applaud. To promote something like the manufacturing, use, and sale of meth is another thing altogether. Shame on you.

Jeff

--As a parent and a business person in SLO County, I am outraged at “Meth Made Easy.” I will no longer be advertising in your newspaper, nor will I ever read it again. If your original theory was to make people aware of the problem and educate them to save their lives, you blew it! All you’ve done is give a detailed lesson on how to manufacture and make money with methamphetamine (providing the person can keep it together).

Debbie

--This time you did it. You have alienated me from your paper. I’m done with New Times. I’ve been reading your paper for the fun, intelligent reporting and entertainment for more than 15 years. I have really enjoyed it, but now I must stop. You have chosen to venture too far off the deep end. I’m very liberal, but I also have children I’m trying to raise, and I want to keep SLO a safe, healthy community. I can’t have New Times around since you seem to have no sense of responsibility at all. Thank you very much for all the great times, but see ya! And tell your advertisers I’ll miss them.

Bonnie

--As the SLO city police chief, I don’t often comment on stories in the New Times, but your article “Meth Made Easy” was so outrageous it demanded a response. The article was completely irresponsible. Your reporter not only glamorized the use of this extremely dangerous drug, but presented a primer on how to manufacture and use it.

Deborah Linden, chief of police
City of San Luis Obispo

I've quoted several responses from readers who are also advertisers in the paper; there were several others that I did not quote. And then there was this. When I originally posted that, it was more of a window-into-my-work with a-witty-close.

The fact remains though that account people for large advertisers are hearing about this and taking appropriate steps to guard their clients dollars. The Cingular account supervisor that spoke to me, I'm certain, will not be the only one to make these kinds of inquiries and take action as a result and the New Times will suffer financially for their decision.